StevanJ

This is what im talking about, you obviously havent played with Touch Controls, otherwise you wouldnt say that. Yeah, I get why youre saying it, but there is feedback, you get a sense of where you are due to small things. If youre in the F-18, your arm rests on your leg, so you get 'some' feedback against that. The F-16, i have arm-rests on my chair, so i know when im sat in that i get feedback from the rest too. If i use my HOTAS, my arms are in the air because im reaching for the HOTAS on my desk. Its not exactly realistic playing in an office chair i know. But then this is the discussion about where we draw the line in the sand. And thats why ill always ask that people go try and do something complicated using VRTC before they highlight issues that dont really exist. I welcome your comment though..

Agree with you there, VR is the future. You either download touch binder and map all the controls, Or you use a keyboard. A mouse isnt exactly realistic, but i understand why you use it- Ive been there.. You dont need to apologise.

This IS great news. Good work Eagle Dynamics. Just a query- will there be any notifications on the modules purchase page or even in the forums (a new VR touch control page in the forum, with a list thats updatable?) that will allow us to know which modules will have some sort of 'touch control support' before purchase.. The last few months have been phenomenal for VR as alot of people got a headset for christmas. In the example of @William i can see more people are getting into the DCS free SU25 with their new VR headset, thinking that all modules are TControl compatible only to find out they arent- Even if it says something along the line of, 'Stick and throttle support 'in beta for touch controls' -bugs might be expected' Im aware nothing is perfect in the computer world, but id be interested in buying a couple of modules P47, Spitfire, F5 included as well as a few 3rd party modules if they're coming with that support, and it would be fantastic if there was a notification for us before we purchase or wait for the 'free to play' events. It would stop me from asking the question (will they be touch control compatible?) every few months.. I know the A10c is currently bugged (stick pulls back the second you grab it), as well as the F15 (joystick grips too high), and the CEagle2 (which is 3rd party but doesnt work too well). Im sure the A10c will be on the update as thats a big one. Ive asked on the community podcast page, so if its going to be answered in the podcast, ill just wait for that. While we have the superb FA18, i cant ask for more, but the hope of an actual 'VTOL VR' with Razbams awesome harrier is always something a man can dream of.

If you buy the FA-18 You 'could' read the 800 pages of manual, But you wont have to, Its very easy to learn. I personally just play with my Quest and Keyboard, No Touchbinder, No Voice attack. If i were you? Buy the FA-18, Learn how to add bombs (mk82) Learn to takeoff (with 'Windows + Home' button at first to get you up in the air) Learn to drop bombs Go online to a 4YA training server, and bomb enemies using the F10 Map Learn to use RWR Learn HARMS (AGM 88c I think) Go online to a 4Ya training server, take out ground radar from afar Learn to use MAV's (Mav's AMG65 with the F at the end are easiest) Go online to a 4Ya training server, and bomb local SAMS (Youll learn basic evasion tactics) Learn to use JSOWs (AGM 154C) Go online to a 4Ya training server, and bomb Base Hawks (long range SAM) Learn to use AGM 62's Go online to a 4Ya training server, and bomb ships. Learn to use AMRAAM's Go online to a 4Ya training server, and shoot small aircraft from far away Learn Aim 9's Go online to a 4Ya training server, and shoot the aircraft from upclose Learn Guns Go online to a 4Ya training server, and shoot down the guns Then learn the SA page, Then learn LGB's Then Learn to refuel in the air.. Then learn how to properly land (chances are youll not experience this if you play online- Youll get shot down alot) Then go back and learn how to start the aircraft. Learn how to tell communicate. Then learn how to land on the carrier. Then decide what was the most fun and do it online in a none training server (Growling Sidewinder) where there is no F10 Map, and its just you and the game. Then learn the Mission Editor and Build your own missions (because we love a contribution back to the community to make the modules more playable) Is that anyhelp? Its a checklist to print and tick?

The Grim Reapers are awesome! Did you see their new Vid 'Carrier Challenge'? So funny! Okay, So the L39 -Despite being a trainer is actually MUCH harder to fly than the FA-18. Its not really a simple aircraft, only technically simple in that there arent many things to learn. You can fly it- Its pretty nice, But for $60 id probably suggest you wait to buy it in sale. As its a little underwhelming when you compare it to the FA-18. The FA-18 for the extra $20 is actually MUCH better value. The L39 can carry A/A, rockets, bombs and guns, and each are quite difficult to set up and use proficiently. Even as a trainer. Once youve learned to use the the munitions, Youll not have much to do. Its not very fast, not very aggressive, doesnt climb much, not particular fun in online play unless youve had someone else in an F18- clear the SAMS for you, i bought it, because i wanted to fly around syria at low-level and do formation flying and such. Its about as good as the Yak (in my opinion), And while its great Its just NOT as easy to use or GOOD as the FA-18. The process alone for using guns on the L39 ive forgotten about 6 times. I wouldnt know how to be 'attacking' if i jumped in it again. The FA-18 for the 25% more cost, will actually keep you busy for about 80% more time. Its not about the aircraft, its about the game. If you buy the FA-18, youll stay in the game longer, it has a multitude of different munitions and bombs each with a similar yet set way of learning how to use them. It has the ability to work at Land and at Sea, It can perform at long range, it can drop a bomb through a window from 30 miles out, and the philosophy of DCS and air warfare is hard wired into that module. It can dogfight, bomb, FAC, intercept at short or range, you can send a number of different warheads to a platoon of tanks from 30 miles out then turn around hit the deck fly 30 miles the other way, and take down a squad of jet fighters that are doing there own bomb drop, while you fly at speed (not even in afterburner) through the valleys, only to touch down on deck, catapult up after resupply and start a completely different mission moments later. Once i played online, we had an FA-18 in lead, take out SAM's with HARM's, then i went in with JSOW's cleared the SAMS, and while my lead was refuelling in the air, i was Lase'ing for our second element who were armed with LGB's. Once the Lead had refuelled, he came to CAP while i landed, and resupplied and got back into the air to fly on his wing providing cover for a squad of A-10's that had come to take out Tanks on the ground (long day that day). The game vastly improves with the FA-18. With the L39, Its just about decent. The systems are intuitive and youll learn them quicker, Dropping a bomb is a few clicks away, launching a mav is a few clicks away, using air to air radar is a few clicks. The only difficult thing youll do is air to air refuel and once you master that, itll never be difficult.. You might spend $60 on the L39, You might be busy for a few days. If you spend $80 on the FA-18, Youll be busy for months. If however you'd prefer that style of aircraft, id more than likely suggest you move to buy Flaming Cliffs 3 first. The SU-27, will probably fit the needs youre talking about. And the Mig29 is a much better dogfighter (in my opinion) than the F-16, but its a 50/50 split every time. It might not seem logical to buy the SU27 before the 'L39 trainer' but its a completely different experience, and even if you did buy the L39, there isnt a High Fidelity module to move upto afterwards just yet.

A year ago id have agreed with you, But not now. A while back i put down my HOTAS, and never looked back. About 11 months ago, there was only one of us from a squad of 12 that used VRTC, now there are 9 of us that are 'converts'. And it revolves around that word you mention 'realistic'.. Is it realistic to use the exact same HOTAS for 17 different airframes (including helicopters and warbirds)- No. Is it more realistic to use actual hand-eye coordination to fly each each different airframe based around actual 'placement' of flightsticks and throttles as you would in the real airframe- Yes. I get it, the HOTAS is the most popular, and the easiest, I remember just how easy it is to air to air refuel with a HOTAS, looking back it almost feels like i was cheating. HOTAS has been the peripheral of choice for a long while now, because we havent experienced VR and the use of their controllers -until theyve only been recently made affordable. And now they are- they are the future. Theyre only going to get better. More functional, More popular. A year ago, id laugh as the kid i flew with, 'chose' to fly with TControls. He struggled and wrestled with the FA-18 in air/a refuels until one day 'he just did it'. Like you, id say 'how is that realistic'? To which he's argue that i was using the same flight controls that i used for all my modules, and argued back, how is THAT realistic.. He was right, I had a button for 'gear' instead of a lever, a throttle for a collective, and my 'joystick map' was the same for every aircraft despite it being not like the aircraft at all. He challenged me- 'Try it for two weeks, and tell me it doesnt feel better- more natural'.. After the two weeks I left my HOTAS on the shelf id put it (a Warthog too). 'Realistic' is defined by being as close to the real thing as possible. VRTC is exactly that despite it still being early on, and the functionality not being entirely there. Buying a £300 HOTAS to have all the buttons on it? You might as well save £300 buy a Quest, and use a keyboard. The benefits of VR far outweigh the HOTAS, This IS visible when you look at into the VR side of any sims, if you buy a VR headset and decide that you'd still prefer a HOTAS, look to get that next. But for the first time since i can remember, i can now fly planes from a Laptop and a quest. Working away has changed for the better. How much of a benefit is my HOTAS when you compare it to a Quest and a keyboard? The arguments For and Against touch controls can be made, but they cant be made by anyone who hasnt experienced flying with them. Learn how to air to air refuel in an F-16 using touch controls, and tell me it felt worse than it did using a HOTAS. The last 3 guys in my squad still use trackIr, and a HOTAS -i get why, but one of them actually returned their G2, because it made them feel sick, and then they turned around and said the same thing, I prefer TrackIr it feels more realistic.. And all he flies is warbirds on the Storm of War.. Ill happily accept that some people prefer a HOTAS and VR, once they can comfortably air to air refuel in the F-16/FA-18. But Id think its obvious its far from realistic using a HOTAS in a warbird, or a chopper and the benefits arent that much when you compare the price of a decent HOTAS to a quest and a keyboard. Maybe im wrong. Who knows?

Ok This sounds like good news! If youre serious about getting into DCS 'VR' using touch controllers go through @THE__PWN3R's history, he has some good references to VR tools in the game. For me, if you want to fly with touch controls, Id start with the FA18. If you enjoy that move to getting a WW2 plane. Depending on the missions you fly constantly, you can then move towards gaining more modules of that type, The F-16 is another one, thats 'early' and as such its not as rewarding to fly using VRTControls but it can be done well, once youve practiced enough on the FA-18. Most of the FC3 modules all work with VRTC too, so if youd prefer 'Low Fi' modules, thats a great value pack to start with alongside the SU-25. The only FC3 module that suffers is the F15, where the joystick 'feels like its too high' in the game. But if you have the money, Id put all your time into the FA18. Its the only aircraft i fly online, and you can take out a set of base defences in one flight, 8 JSOW, 2 Small 82's and the gun. You can also carry (i think) upto 12 A/A missiles if you just wanna stay in the air. The margins you have for error are huge, it can take heavy landings, A/A refueling is easier, and its agility is astounding. The benefits of the FA-18 far outweigh any other aircraft, and its so well polished, i doubt you'd want to fly anything else once youve flown it. It made me put away my HOTAS, it really is that good. The F-16 is good, but its more like a scalpel, fine and precise.. Its not really a 'first module' its very early into the module, so some functionality isnt there, and using the targetting pod, is way more difficult. It can carry more MAV's but they wont beat the JSOW, Dogfighting in the F16 is 'technically' more difficult to learn- Yet easier to do thanks to a more complicated yet better radar system. Air to air refuelling is tougher in the F-16, but it can be done. WW2 using VRTC is SUPERB! Its 'next generation' level immersion. Quite honestly, youll never experience flying like you will in a Warbird using VRTC. Its the closest thing to actually flying a plane. No computer or fly-by wire systems, just you, and the skill of hand- eye co-ordination to beat your opponent. There are a few issues with WW2 AI, and playing online, but if youre a single player, i dont think youll appreciate anything more than the Warbirds. Everything in the Warbirds is 'as it was' in the cockpit, and that makes flying so much better. The HUEY! Get this 3rd. All you can do is takeoff, shoot a few rounds out a puny minigun that only tickles the enemy or fire some rockets, then land. But the experience of flying the Huey is the nearest thing to actually flying a helicopter, I start with a little left trim, move into a hover, then blast around landing on stupid things. Its my second most popular module to play. And its worth every penny. Im happy to play with one hand on the stick another on the keyboard as im on a laptop most of the time, but i believe the user ive mentioned has actually used tools to 'bind' the keys to his touch controller using the VR tools. But honestly if i were to start from scratch, Id buy in this order.. FA-18 Warbird (I prefer the FW190D but choose your favourite as they all have differences in the game) Huey Then all the maps so i can play them online. FC3 F-16 A10C2 (Its MASSIVELY complicated compared to other modules, and is currently having issues with VRTC so id keep an eye on this, but its really decent when its working) Yak-52 (Awesome flight model! But no damage. I let the kids fly this around, a 6 year old can fly it, its that easy! Doesnt do anything but flys and land - So buy in sale) L39 (Fun but youd rather be in the Yak, its great for doing aerobatics if youd just prefer the flying rather than shooting) Hope this helps!

Какие у вас есть карты?

Just out of curiousity who is Andrew Filin? And what did the last statement mean with regards to 'connectors for the cockpit sticks'?~ Are we getting VR implementation for the F5?

Somewhat, but theres a certain numbers game you play in every mission for balance, If youre flying against 1 expert flak, youll have a tough time. If you have 10 rookie flaks (for the immersion of flak around you) youll also have a tough time, If you throw enough 's**t' at a wall, eventually some of it will stick'.. Unless you physically dial down the accuracy of the gunners theres nothing you can do. It feels like the 'skill level' is a 'programme based on chance' not skill by AI. Even on 'rookie' the AI will hit your plane 1 in 10 times (rough estimate), Increasing the skill, means the probability of hitting the aircraft seems to be increased (expert might hit you 5 in 10 times), not the accuracy of the AI. The biggest issue ive personally found is the consistancy of the AI, despite the skill level, the AI will sometimes open fire when they see you, sometimes you have to provoke them before they do anything at all. Ive had missions where ive flown around Kent and into London at 500Ft literally spitting out the cockpit of a FW, and the enemy AI, chill and open a can of boose and watch the airshow, Then ive had missions where ive been shot down literally miles out by flak before im even in the battlefield. After a while you sort of figure out to fly high and dive in to see if they're 'awake'. Then you can plan your run around that. Id love an 'accuracy' setting in the mission editor, that coupled with Anti-Air 'unlimited ammo' and a 'fire even when not in range' trigger, and alot of Flak would seriously make for serious battles and 'blitz style' city bomb runs with gun rounds that light up the air.. In some missions ive had 60 Flak units, some times they rip apart bombers in minutes, sometimes they dont do anything. Nothing you do within the editor changes that. Its either a good day, or a bad day. But in some respects, i guess thats what it was like in the War? What do i know.

Yes please.

Can we have a 'Unit Destroyed by Unit' Trigger, Ie- If Aerial 1-1 Destroys/Damages Aerial 1-2= Flag On? Or if anyone can give me a way in which to do it during a multi player skirmish itd be appreciated. Thanks- But No scripts.

Its like any game with DLC, the guy i fly with spent a similar amount on XPlane and he's at just under 1 tb for all his DLC. SSD's are very cheap though I bought two 1tb used SSD's from ebay, for a little over £110 and combined them via RAID to make 2tb, now i run all my games from those SSD's and i still have half a gig space left. Its been like that for a while. If i dont play something, i uninstall it. If ever i need to back them up, I just send them over to an 8tb HD zipped. With the expansion into hi-res screens and VR headsets, im afraid storage will always take a beating..

So its a rumour (a lie) and you cant back up? Yeah Im not going to read the rest of the Spam, Its not worth anyones time. Ill Just ReQuote Op. So future users can stay on Topic. I think the language barrier is becoming entangled. You arent able to understand what Op is trying to 'create' in the FIRST INSTANT. Remember- Longer Future could mean 100 years.. But youll know how to pull that out of context.

https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3315528/ Привет, ребята, я сделал миссию, и я думаю, вы, ребята, оценили бы ее намного больше, чем мои друзья .. Вы крутые истребители! И я надеюсь, что я сделал это справедливо в этой очень простой миссии ... Это переводчик - извиняюсь, если мой русский не понятен. Спасибо..

Take a minute to analyze all this text, and imagine what you could have achieved without spending all the time 're-iterating' stuff thats been said 2-3 pages ago. It seems the minute people dont like something in this topic, they turn to targetted personal attacks highlighting words said in an effort to dis-credit and belittle others. Well good for you.. Some one else did that in the second world war.. And look at where he ended up with his views. Stop making stuff personal, Calling people a liar is slanderous. Especially when its very obvious that youre angry- that im challenging you to do better. Ive challenged your opinion, and this spam-wall of text, just shows how little thought youre putting into the discussion. Youre literally 'blubbering' off text out of anger, instead of being creative. Highlighting parts of text and pulling it out of context, does not make it context. Youve once again looped around the whole topic of discussion- What is it they say about bored people? 'You have to be very careful what you say when you're around bored people, because bored people are all too happy to take anything you say out of context.' All youre doing is turning the whole topic of discussion on its head, and diverting it away from Op. Youre raising points, without even looking at the discussion that this thread was started with- Selling Asset Packs. And highlighting stuff that 'might never actually come'. If Op doesnt sell any Asset Packs, do you think he's gonna start coding for the latest 'combined arms' upgrade 'within a few weeks'? This is the exact same conversation we had 2-3 pages ago.. Yes, we all want Combined Arms to see improvements. And my argument from my opening post has been 'Work on that first', but its more important to highlight Op's Posts towards what they and theyve said 'in the first instance' are trying to do.. Sell Asset Packs, And thats why this whole discussion on Arma 3 or Tank games is so WAY off topic. OP: I want to sell cold war, post war, and airfield asset packs. YOU GUYS: Youre making Combined Arms 2?!?!? I want it like Arma 3! Op has mentioned that this is something they arent primarily looking at, to which (again) im highlighting the issue with the current asset pack, as to make sure we dont get a repeat. Yet you seem pretty mad that im highlighting a problem that limits others to this game. No one is attacking you, but this has been said numerous times (go check 3-4 pages ago), and I would love to hear other peoples opinion in reply to Op's actual Posts, about Asset Packs, and NOT a discussion to gain potential hope of 'Combined Arms 2' further down the line, which has been literally stamped by Op numerous times as a huge 'maybe' if 'the asset packs' do well. In this he's mentioned something that 'might' (this word means 'possible either way'- ie' I might go, but then again, I might not.) happen if the Asset Packs are received in good spirits. So in order to gain success for Op, i feel its more important to highlight the mistake of WW2 AP, so that the same mistakes arent made, and he can be successful in his venture 'towards the future'. However, as youve mentioned. The liklihood of ED changing the WW2 AP, is small, because if a new asset pack is released, and it doesnt limit players, the people like myself wont be too happy, that we've HAD to pay the money to buy the WW2 AP to play online, for it to become 'limitless'. And thats the challenge i feel we have when we look at Op's Post and to 'the Future'. It would be FAR more important to the improvement to this game, if youd just take that the Combined Arms line of discussion to that thread, and start a wishlist among with other things you'd like about other games. Having that discussion here, does not help Op know if other people would or would not buy the Asset Packs they want to build. Click on his user- see when he was last online, and send him a message for clarity, that way we can end this and move on with our next discussion. Calm down.. Its only a forum with 5 people trying to talk at once. On a side note; Where have ED admitted and learned from the mistake of the WW2 Asset Packs, Thats something im definitely interested in reading about? Or is this just 'rumours'?

We've had this round of conversation.. Its already been done. Its not a personal attack, im just explaining to you. Its not a fancy argument, its just a statement based upon a majority of opinion. Go Hoggit, Mudspike and ask the 60,000 users that talk there. The players go there and dont talk on here because the demographic is different (younger players go Hoggit 'cos its popular', Older players come here 'Because we actually converse about subjects'). The WW2 Asset Pack is not like the Super Carrier, which has been my argument pages ago. If it were, then there would be no issues with anyone making Asset Packs- genuinely. The WW2 Asset Pack IS unique but is actually harming the game- go check the forums and ask for their personal opinions on it. Again, this has ALL been spoken and discussed, which is why were going off topic. Were literally going around in circles (not attacking you- just pointing that out). Ive read every post since the opening one made by OP. Having been an Arma 3 Player a long time, I can understand some of what youre saying. But youre talking about Arma 3.. NOT DCS. Yes this has been my point from my opening post- but that is the problem. We HAVE the ability to play with others, Like youve said, you can own the FA18 and play with others who have the Super Carrier, without having to own the Super Carrier. But this doesnt apply when you look at the way the Asset Pack limits players, on Warbirds Online. Which brings your last statement to a close. You cant say youre happy with the accessibility we have in this game towards others, when the structure in the way WW2 Assets works, is limiting players online. Its a hypocritical statement (not attacking you, midly trying to explain the conflict in your conversation). Im midly asking that if people want to talk about DCS 'Combined Arms' and want to compare that game to others, they go and start the conversation in that part of the forum, so that i can actually see what other peoples opinion are with regards to the new asset packs BP are trying to sell. ReQuoting 2 sentences from an email, over and over is not going to get anyone any closer to finding out who's interested in BP's Post.

Callsign112 referenced alcohol numerous times while highlighting my post. My guess is that he's trying to Insult me by insinuating I am an alcoholic. And yet im the one being threatened with an 'ignore list', because i want to see other people opinion and dont want to see other tank games spammed in the post..

@Fri13 Once again context has been pulled so far out of the thread that now you're on the second loop around. Can you please stop taking focus away from BP's post. I read the first half of this spam, and ignored the last half as it has no relevance to BP's original post. We dont know that, an argument might suggest, that they couldnt if they dont have the 'necessary asset pack'.

I see what youre doing, youre using my own words against me, well im honoured.. How very manipulative and passive aggressive. Ive kept a majority of my conversation on topic, and used references to modules that work well, so that you have an understanding of how Arma DCS wouldnt work well given the scale of this game. This is what you guys are doing, youre getting hype up for 'Ed making dynamic campaing with strategy layer behind' despite this not being mentioned at all. BP have numerous times explained that they are looking to sell another Asset Pack. Stop making stuff up. Stop posting videos of other Tanks games to increase false hype. Start a new thread if you want to talk about other Tanks Games, and stop talking about 'DCS Arma'. Let people come in and tell BP wether or not they'll pay for another Asset Pack. I want to find out what other people are interested in, and youre diverting the topic.

Some Work? Just 'Some'! You need to let Arma go.. You keep saying " One day, this is going to be THE Simulator. " Think about that, think about when that might happen.. Its taken nearly 5 glorious years to get the Hornet to where it is.. And all you want is Arma for DCS.. Go play Arma! Or even Battlefield 4 (which is awesome), Ill even come with you! You guys have just spent the last two pages promoting other Tank simulators. Youve not said one good thing about DCS, while youve been fantasising that 'DCS need to be Arma'.. No, it doesnt, so let it go. Fuelled by 'Forum Stickers', You seem to have Hyped whatever game it is youre 'talking about' and pulled it into a fantasy world crossed with DCS. I support the dream as ive previously mentioned, but you guys have pulled this thread so far from topic, no body would know its a post asking us if we want more paid assets. I too love this game, but I was thinking this game actually need a 'huge amount' of work- Not 'some', just to get it up to an average standard of running gameplay for every single player from the ground, to the sky.. Im expensively patient and i can wait, but if theres a way in which i can ask that resources be put into the game first, id rather they did that 'than actually adding stuff to it' at a cost to us.. How's another asset pack going to make this game any better, when it doesnt run that well (-not complaining)? The FA18 is THE highlight and flagship of DCS, nothing will ever again compare to that module. Nothing.. It will be a very welcome suprise if the F-16, and newer modules surpass the quality to which has gone into the FA18 module, the quality in the craftsmanship is phenomenal, and every coder, artist, and 3d model maker that has worked on it, can raise his head in pride.. The quality in the workmanship and everyone that has committed to that module is just overwhelmingly fantastic and it does represent the game at its highest level. I can not wait for 2026 when the Apache will more than likely becoming to a finish too. Any kid or adult can now fulfil his dreams of flight, for only £80. The Hornet runs 'very nearly' perfectly (with the exception of the game engine, and maps).. But after how long and how much work.. @Callsign112 Youd pay for ANOTHER 'ww2 Asset Pack'? Are you high? Why? So you can chill in a field shooting AI that many dont like- that looks prettier while running at low FPS? I cant even get the AI to takeoff without some bug or another being an issue. How am i gonna shoot down 'paid target pack' when i cant get my Warbird off the ground, or at least into the air, without the engine seizing randomly? Lets try and all work together to get the core game working properly before we look to implement a 'new arma' or another 'WW2 Asset Pack'.. I understand you guys want a tank module and so would i, but from the way youre talking about this other game- Id think youd be better off with that game instead of DCS. At least start a new Topic of discussion if youre going to carry on.

I made this in an hour using free DaVinci Resolve. This one took 2, as it was one of the first ones i made.. But DaVinci does all the work for you.. Hope it helps..

Ha, Its easy, you just need practice.. Refuelling in the F-16 at night is actually easier because you can see the 'formation lights' more clearly under the fuselage. And the FA18 has a light on the probe, so that actually makes things ALOT easier.. As you arent distracted by the plane, you can just focus on the Drogue..

Nobody really comes here and talks about the VR controllers as peripherals, its kind of a new deal for the forum. 6 Months ago, people would literally spit at you, if you told them you flew without a HOTAS. Despite the actual numbers- Try sending a PM over to a moderator. Long term, You dont need to worry, ED have made significant improvements with the VR controllers in the last 6 months. The F-16 has come leaps and bounds in that time, and its completely changed as an aircraft. A patch is more than likely coming in the 2.7 update, But id still send a PM over just in case.. Does the throttle work? Usually, if the throttle works, the Stick follows, and vice versa ie the P47. Thats what happened in the F-16. This is a brand new thing for ED, bare in mind, they dont really know how much influence VTOL VR has made on the sim. I fly with 12 others- 9 of which came over from VTOL VR. With time itll be okay, but its gonna take a while for the 'VR controllers' to be implemented. Im still waiting for the 3rd Party modules to catch up. I think if they realised that having the Harrier 'Touch Control' enabled, they'd actually win a large portion of players from VTOL VR, they'd probably be in a bigger rush to 'make it happen' if they knew but right now, everyones pushing to get modules out and the new clouds too.

Yeah- Thanks for the heads up, It was the EWR 'fun bus', with the radar in the roof.. Is there a way in which to mute them?